4.6 Article

2MASS wide field extinction maps - I. The pipe nebula

期刊

ASTRONOMY & ASTROPHYSICS
卷 454, 期 3, 页码 781-796

出版社

EDP SCIENCES S A
DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361:20042474

关键词

ISM : clouds; ISM : dust, extinction; ISM : structure; ISM : individual objects : Pipe molecular complex; methods : data analysis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aims. We present a 8 degrees x 6 degrees, high resolution extinction map of the Pipe nebula using 4.5 million stars from the Two Micron All Sky Survey (2MASS) point source catalog. Methods. The use of NICER (Lombardi & Alves 2001, A& A, 377, 1023), a robust and optimal technique to map the dust column density, allows us to detect a A(V) = 0.5 mag extinction at a 3-sigma level with a 1 arcmin resolution. Results. (i) We find for the Pipe nebula a normal reddening law, E(J-H) = (1.85 +/- 0.15)E(H-K). (ii) We measure the cloud distance using Hipparchos and Tycho parallaxes, and obtain 130(-58)(+24) pc. This, together with the total estimated mass, 10(4) M-circle dot, makes the Pipe the closest massive cloud complex to Earth. (iii) We compare the NICER extinction map to the NANTEN (CO)-C-12 observations and derive with unprecedented accuracy the relationship between the near-infrared extinction and the (CO)-C-12 column density and hence (indirectly) the (CO)-C-12 X-factor, that we estimate to be 2.91 x 10(20) cm(-2) K-1 km(-1) s in the range AV. [0.9, 5.4] mag. (iv) We identify approximately 1500 OH/IR stars located within the Galactic bulge in the direction of the Pipe field. This represents a significant increase of the known numbers of such stars in the Galaxy. Conclusions. Our analysis confirms the power and simplicity of the color excess technique to study molecular clouds. The comparison with the NANTEN 12CO data corroborates the insensitivity of CO observations to low column densities (up to approximately 2 mag in AV), and shows also an irreducible uncertainty in the dust-CO correlation of about 1 mag of visual extinction.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据